These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

War dec recurrence

Author
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#101 - 2016-09-21 18:03:46 UTC
Hengle Teron wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Hengle Teron wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
All CCP removed was the way to magically see if someone was online. They can still use locator agents to track down where people hang out and they can still declare war and shoot people. They just need to put in a bit of effort now instead of being handed free intel.

Sure, I'd like to see go through a 100 man corp, locating 1 per 10 minutes, with no possible way to tell whether they're even active or not.


Or you can go to lowsec or 0.0 and have some fun there, hold on I see you are in CVA, perhaps you like Honourable Third Parties... Question

Nice try, but I find their gameplay as legit as any other.


Yes of course you do, but that was not really my question, do you direct them on targets too?

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#102 - 2016-09-21 18:04:44 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
a suggestion that someone could simply use a different aspect of the game.

So if we eventually just remove high-sec wars entirely by putting everyone in NPC corps - does that mean everyone who wants to kill anybody in high sec for any reason *has* to start suicide ganking as their only remaining play-style?
If the situation remains the same that having a highsec corp in pointless the vast majority of the time, then yes, I expect that to become the case. That's why CCP really need to look at the situation and make highsec corps feasible for more than just wardecs and space assets. I'd rather see NPC corps disappear altogether and a balanced system of aggression put in that allows people the freedom to play as they want while keeping a level of risk from opposing players, but all the time the system remains the same, I suggest people simply drop corp and use NPC corps and shell corps.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#103 - 2016-09-21 18:05:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Its funny, he complains about blanket wardecs yet supports the removal of the tools that allowed for targeted wardecs.

Its a prime example of CCP listening to people like this, removing something and then finding they made the situation worse for everyone.



Par for the course then. Too many people can't think past Stage 1, they hear an idea that seems aimed at hurting people they already don't like, don't even get past that 1st thought, and think "this will be awesome, I'm in!".

Like Baltec alludes too, we've seen it time and time again. Back when the Dominion sov system was proposed (with the goal of 'breaking up the big groups and helping the small guy), the solo/small gang types were all for it. Better thinkers said "no, that will encourage bigger groups, more stagnation, less fight and more renting". Did the Stage 1s accept that? NOPE.

Result: Blue Donut of Death

Many times a change seemed to be aimed at the Goons. Anti-goons rejoiced. Goons themselves said "this isn't going to turn out how you think", the anti Goon types defaulted to "you just don't like the change because you know it's going to stop your ambitions" (they honeslty could not believe a goon would tell the truth, so they let themselves think the goons were lying) and on it went.

Result: goons got stronger and stronger and the anti-goons types bitterer and bitterer.

More recently change were aimed at gankers and awoxxers and the like. The folks who do that said " you know that's going to make us do it more right?". Stage 1s didn't listen, they rejoiced, YAY more ehp!.

Result: more ganking, awoxxing, scamming, blanket war deccing whatever.

It's like Stage 1s can't understand either the law of unintended consequences of the much more informal but no less true "'Malcanis' Law'". They can't understand that the way to beat styles of play you don't like is to organize, educate and outplay them, you can't get CCP to legislate away people you don't like, that just ticks them off and encourages them.

But every time you reveal this truth to them, they default to "you must be a ganker/wardeccer/goon whatever and are trying to trick me, so i'm going to dig my heals in". Some people are simply beyond help.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#104 - 2016-09-21 18:07:14 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:
Removing watchlists didn't "remove the tools that allowed for targeted wardecs". It simply meant you have to work for intel rather than get spoonfed it.


It means you waste huge amounts of time hunting people not even online.


Lucas Kell wrote:

They didn't. I don't see particularly more blanket wardecs now than there used to be, certainly not a drastic increase, and the number of wardecs so far this year is about on average with the last couple of years. Plus this change wasn't pushed for by people against wardecs, it was pushed for as a way to combat free intel on supercap logins.


CCP have a tack record with nerfing one thing then finding it heavily impacts the wrong target.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#105 - 2016-09-21 18:27:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

CCP have a tack record with nerfing one thing then finding it heavily impacts the wrong target.


then waiting years before they are even ready to admit it...
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#106 - 2016-09-21 18:33:01 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

CCP have a tack record with nerfing one thing then finding it heavily impacts the wrong target.


then waiting years before they are even ready to admit it...

And then doubling down and doing the same thing even more...

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#107 - 2016-09-21 18:51:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
baltec1 wrote:
It means you waste huge amounts of time hunting people not even online.
That's your own fault if you're so bad at intel you can't figure out when someone is offline.

baltec1 wrote:
CCP have a tack record with nerfing one thing then finding it heavily impacts the wrong target.
There's a few instances when that has been true but for the most part its not, and more often than not things are made worse by players adapting to situations of going hell bent on trying to make it worse as some kind of punishment for nerfing their playstyle. The funny thing is you guys do that then start whining when CCP lines you up for another nerf.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#108 - 2016-09-21 21:28:31 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
That's your own fault if you're so bad at intel you can't figure out when someone is offline.


How can you do this when CCP removed the only tool that could tell you if they were online or not?
Lucas Kell wrote:

There's a few instances when that has been true but for the most part its not, and more often than not things are made worse by players adapting to situations of going hell bent on trying to make it worse as some kind of punishment for nerfing their playstyle. The funny thing is you guys do that then start whining when CCP lines you up for another nerf.


So we should just stop playing then? Because thats what you are saying here. Its not the fault of the mercs and pirates that CCP have left them no other option.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#109 - 2016-09-21 21:41:09 UTC
look baltec they needed to kill huge parts of the game so the super pilots felt safe and snug.


this isn't even on the merc end now the ppl that are deced have to assume all WT are online unlike before when you could take more risks when fewer were on slowing down gameplay on both sides
Shallanna Yassavi
qwertz corp
#110 - 2016-09-21 22:15:20 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Its funny, he complains about blanket wardecs yet supports the removal of the tools that allowed for targeted wardecs.

Its a prime example of CCP listening to people like this, removing something and then finding they made the situation worse for everyone.



Par for the course then. Too many people can't think past Stage 1, they hear an idea that seems aimed at hurting people they already don't like, don't even get past that 1st thought, and think "this will be awesome, I'm in!".

Like Baltec alludes too, we've seen it time and time again. Back when the Dominion sov system was proposed (with the goal of 'breaking up the big groups and helping the small guy), the solo/small gang types were all for it. Better thinkers said "no, that will encourage bigger groups, more stagnation, less fight and more renting". Did the Stage 1s accept that? NOPE.

Result: Blue Donut of Death

Many times a change seemed to be aimed at the Goons. Anti-goons rejoiced. Goons themselves said "this isn't going to turn out how you think", the anti Goon types defaulted to "you just don't like the change because you know it's going to stop your ambitions" (they honeslty could not believe a goon would tell the truth, so they let themselves think the goons were lying) and on it went.

Result: goons got stronger and stronger and the anti-goons types bitterer and bitterer.

More recently change were aimed at gankers and awoxxers and the like. The folks who do that said " you know that's going to make us do it more right?". Stage 1s didn't listen, they rejoiced, YAY more ehp!.

Result: more ganking, awoxxing, scamming, blanket war deccing whatever.

It's like Stage 1s can't understand either the law of unintended consequences of the much more informal but no less true "'Malcanis' Law'". They can't understand that the way to beat styles of play you don't like is to organize, educate and outplay them, you can't get CCP to legislate away people you don't like, that just ticks them off and encourages them.

But every time you reveal this truth to them, they default to "you must be a ganker/wardeccer/goon whatever and are trying to trick me, so i'm going to dig my heals in". Some people are simply beyond help.

You missed a part.
Sometimes the counterplay gets made so incredibly dull/bad, nobody will do it. Case in point: stopping miner gankers by shooting at them.
It used to be they would bait a miner into going flashy yellow. This meant the miner would go flashy yellow for a while, and the miner could stall/play with the ganker while something with more teeth showed up.
Now that the gankers drop out of warp on top of the miner and seal the kill in 15 seconds or less, playing guard over miners is hours and hours of boredom.

A signature :o

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#111 - 2016-09-21 22:21:24 UTC
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:

You missed a part.
Sometimes the counterplay gets made so incredibly dull/bad, nobody will do it. Case in point: stopping miner gankers by shooting at them.
It used to be they would bait a miner into going flashy yellow. This meant the miner would go flashy yellow for a while, and the miner could stall/play with the ganker while something with more teeth showed up.
Now that the gankers drop out of warp on top of the miner and seal the kill in 15 seconds or less, playing guard over miners is hours and hours of boredom.


Back when jetcan piracy happened I would find a fleet of miners an drop a can of my own in the middle of them and wait for a pirate to grab it. I then attacked in my battletron V. Naturally I also swiped cans in it and fought whatever the miners brought.

You just don't see this anymore.
Hengle Teron
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#112 - 2016-09-22 01:35:41 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Hengle Teron wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Hengle Teron wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
All CCP removed was the way to magically see if someone was online. They can still use locator agents to track down where people hang out and they can still declare war and shoot people. They just need to put in a bit of effort now instead of being handed free intel.

Sure, I'd like to see go through a 100 man corp, locating 1 per 10 minutes, with no possible way to tell whether they're even active or not.


Or you can go to lowsec or 0.0 and have some fun there, hold on I see you are in CVA, perhaps you like Honourable Third Parties... Question

Nice try, but I find their gameplay as legit as any other.


Yes of course you do, but that was not really my question, do you direct them on targets too?

Given I'm not a locator agent, no.
Valkin Mordirc
#113 - 2016-09-22 02:05:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkin Mordirc
Quote:
K, I don't really see the problem there. Basically you're saying "Before I didn't have to do anything to gather intel, now I have to do stuff!". Personally I'd track their information on killboards and public API looking for changes that indicate activity. Mission runners for example are pretty straight forward, you track their sec status and get your intel tool to not when it changes and build a pattern up for when they are online, then it's a case of tracking down their usual mission locations are and scouting with an alt.


Quote:
That sounds like a problem with target selection though. If you pick a target who is 100% committed to evading you, it should be hard for you to get a kill. Why should you get free intel to make it easier to track them down?


If they are actually evading though yeah 100% agreed.

Just randomly logging off with no way for me to know, for dinner is not evading is annoying.

Quote:
So don't do it. If your entire playstyle is only fun if the system hands you free intel to make it easy to chase your targets, it honestly sounds like you've picked the wrong playstyle.

Edit: also, it shouldn't take you 3 hours. Once you get to the system he's supposed to be in and run one more locator agent that confirms he's in that system, you know he's offline.


Not free intel. I used the watchlist as it was available for the need. But I could handly do what I did before, by paying for it. Which is what I've been asking for the last year. I don't want the watchlist back. I couldn't give a flying **** about. I just want to know if a target I'm looking for is online when I want to know. If I need to pay a price for that I'm fine.

And if targets are mobile and bouncing around it's entirely possible to chase someone for 3 hours. I've done it before. It was annoying but worth it.

Quote:
Alternatively you could simply pick targets who are willing and able to fight back.


I do? I don't see what your point is. Just because I have targets that I'm decced with that will fight. Doesn't mean I have an easier time at finding them. Obviously.
#DeleteTheWeak
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#114 - 2016-09-22 05:16:42 UTC
Hengle Teron wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Hengle Teron wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Or you can go to lowsec or 0.0 and have some fun there, hold on I see you are in CVA, perhaps you like Honourable Third Parties... Question

Nice try, but I find their gameplay as legit as any other.


Yes of course you do, but that was not really my question, do you direct them on targets too?

Given I'm not a locator agent, no.


Yeah right, but if CVA have not worked out what you are up to, I am not going to tell them.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#115 - 2016-09-22 07:16:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
How can you do this when CCP removed the only tool that could tell you if they were online or not?
They didn't. Track someone down, then when you're in the system that the locator agent said they were in, the locator agent still says they are there and they aren't in local, then they are offline. As usually you're massively exaggerating because you're sad that added effort.

baltec1 wrote:
So we should just stop playing then? Because thats what you are saying here. Its not the fault of the mercs and pirates that CCP have left them no other option.
That's not even remotely what I said. What I've said is you make it worse for yourselves because you purposely try to punish CCP when they do something you don't like by trying to make whatever they were trying to fix worse. Perhaps if you worked with CCP to improve the gameplay rather than desperately trying to retain effort free gameplay for yourselves at any cost, there'd be improvements you like. If you're just gonna sit around though pretending all is fine because it's not you that has to put up with being someone's playtoy in a game you pay to enjoy, don't expect CCP to back you up.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#116 - 2016-09-22 07:25:09 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
If they are actually evading though yeah 100% agreed.

Just randomly logging off with no way for me to know, for dinner is not evading is annoying.
But that's simple to determine as I explained above to baltec. If you had instant free intel like the watchlist though you would also be able to use it against people who are actively evading. You'd know their state constantly so there'd be no work on your side. The moment they log on you'd go hunting them again.

Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Not free intel. I used the watchlist as it was available for the need. But I could handly do what I did before, by paying for it. Which is what I've been asking for the last year. I don't want the watchlist back. I couldn't give a flying **** about. I just want to know if a target I'm looking for is online when I want to know. If I need to pay a price for that I'm fine.
Well that's great, because you can.

Valkin Mordirc wrote:
And if targets are mobile and bouncing around it's entirely possible to chase someone for 3 hours. I've done it before. It was annoying but worth it.
It's possible to chase someone for 3 hours, but you were saying it takes you 3 hours of chasing someone to realise he's offline. Once he logs off it should take you 5 minutes tops to figure that out. An active player evading you is absolutely supposed to take as long as they are able to successfully evade you.

Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I do? I don't see what your point is. Just because I have targets that I'm decced with that will fight. Doesn't mean I have an easier time at finding them. Obviously.
But you obviously don;t if your entire playtime is spent chasing people around. If they wanted to fight back they wouldn't be running away and your first locator agent on an active target would lead to a fight. Being that you'd know from initial intel where they tend to hang out you could buzz a scout though their systems too.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#117 - 2016-09-22 07:39:18 UTC
All CCP removed was the way to magically see if someone was online. They can still use locator agents to track down where people hang out and they can still declare war and shoot people. They just need to put in a bit of effort now instead of being handed free intel.[/quote]
Sure, I'd like to see go through a 100 man corp, locating 1 per 10 minutes, with no possible way to tell whether they're even active or not.[/quote]

Or you can go to lowsec or 0.0 and have some fun there, hold on I see you are in CVA, perhaps you like Honourable Third Parties... Question[/quote]
Nice try, but I find their gameplay as legit as any other.[/quote]

Yes of course you do, but that was not really my question, do you direct them on targets too?[/quote]
Given I'm not a locator agent, no.[/quote]


If you bothered to fly your own space ie Provi where CVA holds sovereignty you wouldn't need locator agents, there's targets galore, all day every day, or are those too hard?

There seems to be a lot of ill feeling down there towards your alliance, it's little wonder when you aren't even there to defend it....

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#118 - 2016-09-22 09:25:42 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:
They didn't. Track someone down, then when you're in the system that the locator agent said they were in, the locator agent still says they are there and they aren't in local, then they are offline. As usually you're massively exaggerating because you're sad that added effort.



So yea, no tool to see if they are online or not, you wind up wasting your time chasing shadows.
Lucas Kell wrote:

What I've said is you make it worse for yourselves because you purposely try to punish CCP when they do something you don't like by trying to make whatever they were trying to fix worse.


They have no other option than to blanket dec, if you force people into a corner like this you can't blame them for trying to make the best of a bad situation.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#119 - 2016-09-22 09:41:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
They didn't. Track someone down, then when you're in the system that the locator agent said they were in, the locator agent still says they are there and they aren't in local, then they are offline. As usually you're massively exaggerating because you're sad that added effort.



So yea, no tool to see if they are online or not, you wind up wasting your time chasing shadows.
Lucas Kell wrote:

What I've said is you make it worse for yourselves because you purposely try to punish CCP when they do something you don't like by trying to make whatever they were trying to fix worse.


They have no other option than to blanket dec, if you force people into a corner like this you can't blame them for trying to make the best of a bad situation.


Well if you don't do your intel gathering before hand it is your fault for chasing shadows, Eve is not supposed to be a game that holds your hand is it, or is it a game that holds the hands of certain people who call themselves content creators, even when it is naff content.

They were already blanket decking people, it just made everyone move to the most lazy option when an easy intel tool was removed from them. This has affected more than just hisec sec war deckers, it made dealing with BLOP's groups more difficult.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#120 - 2016-09-22 09:49:55 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


Well if you don't do your intel gathering before hand it is your fault for chasing shadows, Eve is not supposed to be a game that holds your hand is it, or is it a game that holds the hands of certain people who call themselves content creators, even when it is naff content.


There is no tools for checking to see if they are online so there is no way to get intel like that.


Dracvlad wrote:

They were already blanket decking people


And now everyone has to do it. GG, you once again played yourself.